Airbus and the P&W neo enigine
Thread Starter
Airbus and the P&W neo enigine
I would be interested to hear of first hand experience of operating the PW neo engine on Airbus aircraft. Apart from extended start and idle times before applying take off thrust , I believe there have also been bleed problems causing cruise level restrictions. The unmentionable airline appear to have rejected their order so what do other think of it? A large european loco have ordered it, will they be disappointed?
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: France
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also some problems of durability. The engine can blow out after as little as 50 hours.
PW is actively working on it.
I really wonder how any airline would buy it, except for very low prices or very high trust in Pratt.
PW is actively working on it.
I really wonder how any airline would buy it, except for very low prices or very high trust in Pratt.
Pratt has pretty much bet their (commercial) future on the geared fan concept, so I'm sure no effort will be spared in getting it right and working out all the bugs.
The real question is how long will it take, and will the airlines be willing to wait and/or put up with the problems until they get it worked out.
I see Pratt is paying Bombardier to compensate for late C-Series deliveries due to Pratt's inability to deliver new engines on time.
I'd hate to see Pratt pull out of the commercial market and focus entirely on the military side, but if they can't get the issues with their geared fan engines resolved fairly quickly that could easily happen.
The real question is how long will it take, and will the airlines be willing to wait and/or put up with the problems until they get it worked out.
I see Pratt is paying Bombardier to compensate for late C-Series deliveries due to Pratt's inability to deliver new engines on time.
I'd hate to see Pratt pull out of the commercial market and focus entirely on the military side, but if they can't get the issues with their geared fan engines resolved fairly quickly that could easily happen.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A rather unnerving 700kgs diversion fuel where the CEO would be more like 1,100 or 1,200!
Overpowered taxi on single pack too. If your SOP is single pack on the ground, then you'll probably be putting both on to reduce that residual rocket thrust and avoid the otherwise constant braking.
I have experienced minor reverser faults on the ECAM too after starting.
Overpowered taxi on single pack too. If your SOP is single pack on the ground, then you'll probably be putting both on to reduce that residual rocket thrust and avoid the otherwise constant braking.
I have experienced minor reverser faults on the ECAM too after starting.
That's quite intersting. I wonder if that's a characteristic of GTFs in general, or something specific about what P&W have done. I'll have to ponder that. I wonder how that'd scale if RR did a large 90klbs GTF?
